Dick’s Sporting Goods pulls machine guns from shelves

Friends of mine were shopping at a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in Kenosha yesterday when they noticed employees removing guns from the shelves. Certain guns are coming down from the shelves in other Wisconsin locations, too. Staff at a Dick’s Sporting Goods Store in Madison confirmed they will no longer sell Mrs machine rifles, but will continue to sell rifles and ammo for hunting.

Dick’s Sporting Goods, one of the largest sporting goods retailers in the world, says it has removed all guns from its store nearest to Newtown, Connecticut, and is suspending the sale of certain kinds of semi-automatic rifles from its chains nationwide.

The move was made out of respect for the victims and families of last week’s Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting “during this time of national mourning,” the store said in a statement Tuesday morning.

“We continue to extend our deepest sympathies to those affected by this terrible tragedy,” the statement said.

It’s unclear how long this suspension of machine gun sales will last.

The move comes after reports that investigators were trying to determine whether the gunman in the Newtown shooting, Adam Lanza, tried to buy a gun from a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in the city of Danbury, about 12 miles away.

“At this time, reports that the suspect visited one of our stores last week have not been confirmed by law enforcement,” the sporting goods store said in a statement. “Based on our records, we can confirm that no firearms were sold to the suspect identified in this case.”

Either way, it’s good to see that Dick’s is taking action. Actions speak louder than words.

With all due respect, you\’re an idiot or an ideologue, or an idiotic ideologue, because no reasonable, decent, or even mildly intelligent person could have read the story contained in the link I provided and then make the kind of asinine comment you just posted.

The point of the article I linked to is that Australia hasn\’t had a Newtown style mass shooting since 1996, after strict gun controls were enacted. The National Review Article makes no mention of that fact. That fact. Fact.

How brilliant of you Steve to find a typo i made from my touch pad. Try staying on point and avoid attempting to come across as some scholar, I\’m not in the least bit impressed. The Australia comparison has been debated in the media to no resolve. Each side within their own country are still debating it. Cultural difference are among the most talked about. Even you should know what may work in one country doesn\’t mean it will work in another. I hate to think about what would happen here in the U.S. If our government tried the same thing. I think we all know the outcome better be an educated compromise and more than just guns in the equation. Nuff said.

A guy that wants to kill someone who has has several years in the army at the sharp end is going to do it, even if he has no guns.

Tim McVeigh got the same training in improvised explosives as guys on the teams and the infantry and recon military occupational specialities. Folks that have had that training can improvise explosives from several different methods using grocery store items as well as other materials.

All of those materials are still readily available.

The reason he left the army was that he failed somes mental exams the army gives at certain times to avoid keeping soldiers who are becoming unwired or otherwise no longer safe to send into combat.

He proved then right four years later.

In the army one of the first things a new troop is taught is all the weapons are tools and it is the soldier who is dangeous, that may be one reason vets tend to place more blame on the shooters, not the guns.